FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND BUSINESS STUDIES Department of Business and Economics Studies

Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Influence on Consumer Purchasing

Behavior:

An alternative model

Josue Ponce Rios

2016

Student thesis, Master degree (one year), 15 HE Business Administration

Master Programme in Business Administration (MBA): Business Management Master Thesis in Business Administration

Supervisor: Sarah Philipson

Examiner: Maria Fregidou-Malama

Abstract

Title: Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Influence on Consumer Purchasing Behavior:

An alternative model

Level: Final assignment for Master Degree in Business Administration

Author: Josue Ponce Rios

Supervisor: Sarah Philipson

Examiner: Maria Fregidou-Malama

Date: March 2016

Aim: To provide an alternative model that can measure the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer

purchasing behavior and identify which types of initiatives have the greatest positive effect on this behavior.

Method: This study undertakes a qualitative approach to data collection. The data was obtained through

telephone interviews of grocery store consumers in Sweden. Participants were selected using a purposive

sampling approach. Grounded Theory was used to analyze the data collected.

Result & Conclusions: The study proposes an alternative model to measure the influence of CSR

initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior and posits three theory-based purchasing behavior scenarios

(S) that can be used to determine the level of such influence (S1: High influence; S2: Moderate influence;

S3: Low influence). However, when testing the model to find any possible additional scenarios (other than

the theory-based ones) the results show a pattern depicting a new scenario (S4: Extreme influence) that

does not appear to be explained by present theory. Consequently, the study concludes that in addition to the

three theory-based scenarios (S1, S2 & S3) an additional scenario based on the empirical findings of this

research, (S4), should be added to the list of scenarios used in determining the influence of CSR initiatives

on consumer purchasing behavior.

Suggestions for future research: Future studies should test the proposed model in a quantitative manner,

using probability sampling, in order to be able to determine the level of influence that CSR initiatives have

on the purchasing behavior of the general grocery store consumer population; as well as which initiatives

have the most positive influence on such behavior.

Contribution of the thesis: At the theoretical level, the study provides a model that can reconcile

contradictions/gaps in the existent literature regarding the actual possibility of CSR initiatives to positively

influence consumer purchasing behavior as well as an additional purchasing behavior scenario (S4) for

determining the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior. At the managerial level,

application of the proposed model can also reveal important information for managers, such as how sensitive

grocery store consumers are to CSR initiatives and which initiatives provide the most positive influence on the

purchasing behavior of such consumers. Finally, at the societal level, the proposed model can assist in

ascertaining the level of socially responsible consumer behavior (SRCB) of consumers in a particular society

(e.g. grocery store consumers in Sweden).

Key words: CSR initiatives, CSR influence, consumer purchasing behavior

Acknowledgements

Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Assistant Professor Sarah Philipson, for her

constant guidance throughout the process of completing this study. I would also like to

thank Assistant Professor Maria Fregidou-Malama, in her capacity as instructor for the

Master Thesis Course at the University of Gävle, for her assistance in the early stages of

this study.

In addition, my gratitude goes out to all the people that participated in the interviewing

process. The study could not have been completed without your participation.

Finally, to my family in the United States and Sweden, I truly thank you all for your

support throughout this process.

Josue Ponce Rios

March 2016, Stockholm, Sweden

Table of Contents 1.IntroductoryChapter.................................................................................................................11.1Background..........................................................................................................................................11.2Problematization................................................................................................................................31.3Researchaim&questions...............................................................................................................41.4Delimitations.......................................................................................................................................5

2.TheoryChapter............................................................................................................................62.1TheconceptofCSR.............................................................................................................................62.1.1Societal-marketingbaseddefinitions....................................................................................................62.1.2Multidimensionaldefinitions....................................................................................................................7

2.2CSR&itsinfluenceonconsumerpurchasingbehavior.......................................................102.2.1Confirmationtheory...................................................................................................................................112.2.2Consumersupportdependenttheory................................................................................................122.2.3Disconfirmationtheory.............................................................................................................................13

2.3MeasuringtheinfluenceofCSRinitiativesonconsumerpurchasingbehavior..........152.3.1ConsumerawarenessofCSR..................................................................................................................152.3.2Consumerperceptionofcompanymotivation...............................................................................162.3.3Productprice.................................................................................................................................................172.3.4Productquality.............................................................................................................................................17

2.4ClassifyingCSRinitiatives..............................................................................................................182.5Evaluationofthetheories..............................................................................................................202.5.1Reflectionoverthestateoftheart.......................................................................................................22

2.6Model....................................................................................................................................................232.6.1MeasuringconsumersensitivitytoCSRinitiatives......................................................................232.6.2Scenario1:Highinfluence.......................................................................................................................252.6.3Scenario2:Moderateinfluence.............................................................................................................262.6.4Scenario3:Lowinfluence........................................................................................................................27

3.Methodologychapter..............................................................................................................283.1Researchdesign................................................................................................................................283.2Populationandsample...................................................................................................................303.3Operationalizing...............................................................................................................................343.4Analysismethod................................................................................................................................393.5Qualitymeasures..............................................................................................................................403.5.1Externalreliability......................................................................................................................................403.5.2Internalreliability.......................................................................................................................................423.5.3Internalvalidity............................................................................................................................................423.5.4Externalvalidity...........................................................................................................................................43

4.Empiricalresultschapter......................................................................................................444.1Resultsandglobalpatterns..........................................................................................................444.2Resultsandlocalpatterns.............................................................................................................49

5.Analysischapter.......................................................................................................................525.1Anewscenario..................................................................................................................................525.2Reasonsfornewscenario..............................................................................................................52

6.Conclusionchapter..................................................................................................................546.1NumberofscenariosfordeterminingtheinfluenceofCSRIonCPB...............................546.2Futurestudies....................................................................................................................................576.3Implications........................................................................................................................................576.4Reflectionsandlimitations...........................................................................................................58

Appendices.....................................................................................................................................61Appendix1.DescriptionofResponseHeaders.............................................................................61Appendix2.ListofInterviewQuestions..........................................................................................64Appendix3.InterviewTranscripts....................................................................................................66

References.......................................................................................................................................88

List of Tables

Table 1. Societal-marketing based definitions in CSR literature………………………….7

Table 2. Widely used multidimensional definitions in CSR literature ………..……….....9

Table 3. Differing theories regarding the influence of CSRI on CPB…………………...10

Table 4. Trends of studies within the presented differing theories………………………15

Table 5. Dimensions of CSR initiatives……………………………………………….....19

Table 6. State-of-the-art evaluation...................................................................................22

Table 7. Operationalizing process……………………………………………………….39

Table 8. Respondent answers…………………………………………………...………..47

List of Figures

Figure 1. Four elements for measuring CSRI influence on CPB……………...…………24

Figure 2. Proposed model for measuring CSRI influence on CPB…………...…………25

Figure 3. Scenario 1: High Influence of CSRI on CPB………………………………….26

Figure 4. Scenario 2: Moderate Influence of CSRI on CPB……………………………..27

Figure 5. Scenario 3: Low Influence of CSRI on CPB………………….……………….27

Figure 6. Global patterns………………………………………………………...………48

Figure 7. Local patterns………………………………………………………………….50

Figure 8. List of scenarios for determining the influence of CSRI on CPB……………..56

1

1. Introductory Chapter

1.1 Background

The idea that businesses and other organizations have social responsibilities, branded as

“Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSR), has stimulated considerable interest among

business managers and researchers (Vaaland, Heide & Grønhaug, 2008) and seems to be at

the frontline of corporate consciousness today (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen, 2007), as consumers

increasingly expect companies to create and carry out CSR initiatives (Lantos, 2001).

This interest among business managers can, according to Economist (2015-10-08A), be seen

in the trend that top executives in companies such as Marks & Spencer (one of the UK’s

largest retailers), are creating executive positions such as Director of Accountability and

Triple-bottom-line Leadership, with the sole purpose of dealing with CSR matters and

initiatives. Moreover, top company executives, such as the former CEO of the Barclays

Group, Antony Jenkins, are even becoming directly involved in external organizations dealing

with CSR and sustainability (Economist, 2015-10-07A).

The reason for this increased interest in CSR initiatives among company executives could be

attributed to factors such as scandals in large multinational corporations, such as Enron,

Worldcom, etc., which have led to a widespread mistrust of businesses on behalf of the

general public and consumers, which hurt companies’ reputations and business (Economist,

2015-10-08A). This mistrust has in turn forced consumers (Economist, 2015-10-07A), non-

governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as governments to take a greater interest in CSR

issues and as a result, governments have now imposed regulations regarding CSR, which has

forced executives in businesses to forcefully gain more interest in CSR (Economist, 2015-10-

08A). However, the increased interest of executives and companies in CSR is also due to the

realization that CSR initiatives can provide benefits that can enhance and add value to a

company’s image (Economist, 2015-10-07A), its competitive advantage (Economist, 2015-

10-08B), and even create monetary value (Economist, 2015-10-07B), by inducing repeat

purchases by consumers/customers. Dominic Barton, Global Managing Director of

McKinsey, states that CSR and long-term company profitability go hand in hand (Wall Street

Journal, 2015-10-07).

In the academic world, several researchers also posit that that carrying out CSR initiatives can

provide benefits to businesses, in addition to their stakeholders (e.g. Du et al., 2007;

2

Lichtenstein, Drumwright & Braig, 2004; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004; Sen & Bhattacharya,

2001; Sen, Bhattacharya & Korschun, 2006). For example, Bhattacharya & Sen (2004) found

that CSR initiatives create business benefits, such as customer loyalty, positive word of

mouth, and positively affecting consumer purchasing behavior.

As a result of the possible benefits obtained from carrying out CSR initiatives, Lichtenstein et

al. (2004) state that there is a surge of CSR initiatives by corporations, as businesses are

recognizing CSR as an important aspect of their success. This surge is especially noticed in

the grocery industry, which has received major attention from the general public in regards to

CSR-related matters, as this industry, as well as its products and production methods have an

inherently intense effect on the environment and on people (Anselmsson & Johansson, 2007).

Consequently, according to Anselmsson & Johansson (2007), the grocery industry deals in

and is involved in many areas that are directly correlated to CSR (e.g. animal welfare,

sustainable farming, ethical treatment of farmers, etc.).

Regarding studies concerning CSR within the grocery industry, it is important to note that the

existent CSR-retail literature has largely focused on CSR initiatives undertaken by retailers at

the corporate level (i.e. initiatives stated in retailers’ CSR agendas and reports) and has

ignored CSR in terms of the product assortment of retailers (i.e. initiatives communicated

through a retailer’s CSR-labeled product assortment) even though a retailer’s product

assortment is an important aspect of its social responsibility (Carrero & Valor, 2012).

Therefore, there seems to be a need for research that focuses on CSR in the grocery industry

through the retailers’ CSR-labeled product assortment. Such research can be of importance,

particularly on studies attempting to measure the influence of CSR on consumer purchasing

behavior, as CSR labels on products can act as an effective point-of-purchase communication

method (Pomering & Dolnicar, 2009), and point-of-purchase communications assist in

creating awareness of company CSR initiatives, which is particularly low among consumers

and is actually a prerequisite for such initiatives to influence consumer purchasing behavior

(Du, Bhattacharya & Sen, 2010).

Recognizing the importance given to company CSR initiatives by both consumers and

businesses, especially within the grocery retail sector, as well as the lack of CSR research

within the grocery industry focusing on retailers’ CSR-labeled product assortment, this study

will focus on CSR initiatives communicated through labeled grocery products sold by

Swedish grocery retailers (private label or otherwise).

3

1.2 Problematization

As mentioned in the previous section, both managers and researchers posit that there are

benefits that businesses can obtain from the execution of CSR initiatives. However, there is

one company benefit resulting from CSR initiatives that appears to be particularly complex,

as its study produces contradicting results in the existent CSR literature, and therefore, it is of

specific interest and focus in this study: the positive influence of CSR company initiatives on

consumer purchasing behavior.

Concerning this particular benefit, the existent CSR literature provides several studies that

recognize and confirm the possible positive influence of CSR company initiatives on

consumer purchasing behavior (e.g. Creyer & Ross, 1997; Scholder-Ellen, Webb & Mohr,

2006; Castaldo, Perrini, Misani & Tencati, 2009; Barone, Miyazaki & Taylor, 2000).

However, according to Scholder-Ellen et al. (2006), CSR can be executed by firms through

different initiatives focusing on philanthropy, cause-related marketing, and environmental

responsibility, among others. Consequently, several other studies reveal that the extent to

which a company’s CSR initiatives can positively influence the purchasing behavior of

consumers actually depends on the support that consumers have for the type of CSR initiative

that companies engage in (e.g. Du et al., 2007; Anselmsson & Johansson, 2007; Mohr &

Webb, 2005; David, Kline & Dai, 2005). For example, Mohr & Webb (2005) reveal that the

CSR initiatives focusing on environmental issues had a greater effect on the purchasing

behavior of American footwear consumers than CSR initiatives focusing on philanthropic

issues such as corporate giving (donations). Consequently, these findings imply that not all

CSR initiatives will have the same level of positive influence on the purchasing behavior of

consumers.

Finally, there are also findings that, conversely, do not agree with the notion regarding the

ability of CSR initiatives to positively affect the purchasing behavior of consumers. Mohr,

Webb & Harris (2001), Carrigan & Attalla (2001) and De Pelsmacker, Driesen & Rayp

(2005), for example, yield that CSR initiatives by companies have no effect what so ever on

consumer purchasing behavior. Therefore, these studies offer contradictory evidence to the

notion that CSR initiatives by companies can have a positive effect on the purchasing

behavior of consumers.

Adding to the complexity regarding the phenomenon of the positive effect of CSR initiatives

4

in consumer purchasing behavior is the apparent presence of an attitude-behavior gap in studies concerning this phenomenon. Numerous researchers declare that there appears to be an inconsistency between the willingness that consumers have to purchase goods from socially responsible businesses and their real purchasing behavior (e.g. De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006; Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Castaldo et al., 2009; Mohr et al., 2001). This inconsistency, called the attitude-behavior gap, occurs as a result of a proposed need people have to appear as socially responsible consumers (Mohr et al., 2001), and as a result, consumers may exaggerate their purchase intentions in comparison to their actual behavior. Consequently, this poses a challenge in determining the actual positive influence of CSR in the purchasing behavior of consumers.

Nevertheless, in the midst of the complexity regarding this phenomenon, the existent literature provides at least four elements that can be used to measure the positive influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior: consumer awareness, consumer-perceived company motivation, product price, and product quality. These elements and their role in achieving the aim of this study will be further explicated in the theoretical chapter of this paper.

1.3 Research aim & questions

Taking into consideration the aforementioned research contradictions / gaps regarding the

actual possibility of CSR initiatives to affect consumer purchasing behavior and the inequality

of CSR initiatives in regards to their positive impact on consumer purchasing behavior, the

aim for this study is to provide an alternative model that can measure the influence of CSR

initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior and identify which types of initiatives have the

greatest positive effect on this behavior. Thereby reconciling the aforementioned conflicts

within the present literature.

In order to reach the abovementioned aim, the proposed research questions are the following:

• How can one measure the sensitivity that consumers have to CSR initiatives, when

making purchasing decisions?

• How can one classify the types of CSR initiatives that consumers sponsor the most?

• What are the possible scenarios /outcomes resulting from the application/use of the

model that can determine the level of influence that CSR initiatives have on consumer

purchasing behavior?

5

1.4 Delimitations

Even though this study acknowledges the existence and effects of the attitude-behavior gap on

consumer behavior research, this phenomenon will not be the main focus of this study.

Although controls will be undertaken in order to close this gap.

6

2. Theory Chapter

2.1 The concept of CSR

CSR is a concept that has been conceptualized in the existent literature in many different

ways. According to Carroll & Shabana (2010), researchers have postulated a vast number of

different definitions for CSR during the last fifty years. One major reason for the abundant

variability of CSR definitions / conceptualizations in the existent literature is due to the

different viewpoints that people have in regards to the responsibility and duty of companies

within societies in general (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001). Consequently, an all-inclusive

definition of CSR would be too ambiguous to be valuable in scholar debates or in practical

implementations (van Marrewijk, 2003), as the sheer omnipresence of CSR in different areas

of society (e.g. business, political, governmental, academic) impedes it from having any one

distinct meaning (Maignan & Ferrell 2004). As a result of this, there exists an uncertainty

among academics and practitioners as to how CSR ought to be defined (Dahlsrud, 2008).

Nevertheless, Mohr (1996, after Mohr et al., 2001) has classified the definitions of CSR into

two distinct groups: (1) societal-marketing based definitions and (2) multidimensional

definitions.

2.1.1 Societal-marketing based definitions

According to Mohr et al. (2001), societal-marketing based definitions of CSR are used to

define CSR in a more abstract (general) way. These definitions focus on the societal

marketing concept, which according to the authors, emphasizes that socially responsible firms

should have interests beyond short-term profits and should demonstrate this by executing

business practices in a way that avoids harm and upholds or progresses the wellbeing of

stakeholders (e.g. customers) and society. Examples of such definitions of CSR can be found

in existent CSR literature (see table 1).

Definitions Authors

“… a company’s commitment to minimizing or eliminating any harmful effects and maximizing its long-run beneficial impact on society”

Mohr et al. (2001:47)

7

“CSR refers to the obligations of the firm to society or, more specifically, the firm’s stakeholders – those affected by corporate policies and practices.”

Smith (2003:53)

“…the organization’s status and activities with respect to its perceived societal obligations.”

Brown & Dacin (1997:68)

“… clearly articulated and communicated policies and practices of corporations that reflect business responsibility for some of the wider societal good.”

Matten & Moon (2008:405)

Table 1. Societal-marketing based definitions in CSR literature, own.

2.1.2 Multidimensional definitions

According to Mohr et al. (2001), multidimensional definitions of CSR actually outline the

main social responsibilities of businesses.

There are many different multidimensional definitions of CSR posited by authors within the

existing CSR literature, as researchers seem to custom-make their definitions to fit CSR

within a particular context or study. However, there appears to be three multidimensional

definitions of CSR that are widely used in the CSR literature as ready-applicable frameworks

and as a base for other researchers to develop their own multidimensional definitions. These

widely used definitions (see table 2) are those posited by Carroll (1991); Lantos (2001); and

Sen & Bhattacharya (2001).

Carroll (1991) suggests that in order for the concept of CSR to be understood and accepted by

the business community, it must be framed into categories (dimensions) that embrace the

complete range of responsibilities that businesses have in regards to society. As a result, the

author posits that there are four kinds of dimensions that embody CSR in its totality. These

dimensions encompass the economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities of

firms respectively. Carroll (1991) describes economic responsibilities as the responsibility

that firms have to provide goods and services that the society needs, while making acceptable

profits for the firm and its shareholders. Legal responsibilities are described as the duty to

follow the laws and regulations established by relevant authorities, such as governments,

when pursuing their business objectives. The third responsibility that firms have towards

society is an ethical one. According to the author, this responsibility entails to go beyond the

compliance of established laws and actually consider and act according to society’s

expectations regarding the approval or disapproval of business practices and activities,

8

including those dealing with the respect and defense of the moral rights of stakeholders. The

final dimension posited by the author, philanthropic responsibility, embodies the activities

undertaken by firms, as a response to the apparent societal expectation that businesses should

be decent corporate citizens and help improve the welfare of society. Such activities,

according to the author, include financial contributions (donations) that improve quality of

life, e.g. contributions to communities, education, the arts, etc.

Lantos (2001) proposes three main dimensions for company CSR activities within his

multidimensional definition. These dimensions of CSR are ethical, altruistic, and strategic

CSR. Ethical CSR encompasses activities that firms undertake in order to fulfill their moral

responsibilities. These are activities, which are undertaken to avoid societal harm, can

include: product safety initiatives, pollution control activities, etc. Altruistic CSR has the

same meaning as the fourth dimension in the CSR definition by Carroll (1991). This

dimension encompasses philanthropic activities undertaken to exhibit a humanitarian

consideration to society, which can benefit society at the expense of business, since these

activities may not yield returns to the firm, as this is not the intention behind this dimension.

The third and final dimension of CSR in the definition posited by Lantos (2001), strategic

CSR, encompasses CSR activities that companies undertake because they are believed to be

good for business, in addition to society. In other words, these are activities undertaken by

companies because of the potential benefits (e.g. customer loyalty, positive word of mouth,

repeat purchasing, etc.) they can provide (Lantos 2001).

In the multidimensional definition provided by Sen & Bhattacharya (2001), the authors group

the CSR initiatives of over 600 companies, which were recorded in an already existent

database, into six general dimensions: community support, diversity, employee support,

environment, non-domestic operations, and product. The first dimension, community support,

encompasses all the company initiatives dealing with supporting (through corporate giving)

local communities: e.g. supporting the arts, education, underprivileged areas, people, etc. The

dimension of diversity includes activities taken to encourage and increase diversity regarding

gender, race, sexual orientation, etc., both outside and inside the organization. The employee

support dimension comprises activities concerning employee issues, such as job safety,

security, employee involvement, etc. The environment dimension covers initiatives focusing

on environmental responsibility. Such initiatives include recycling, pollution control, waste

management, etc. The fifth dimension involves CSR activities in non-domestic operations,

i.e. operations in foreign markets. Such activities can include ethical overseas labor practices

9

and ethical selection of subsidiaries abroad, e.g. avoiding having operations in countries with

human rights violations. The sixth and final dimension embraces CSR activities related to the

product of a firm. This includes activities geared towards regulating product safety, marketing

controversies, safe research, development, etc.

Authors CSR Dimensions (Types)

1. Carroll (1991) 1. Economic 2. Legal 3. Ethical 4. Philanthropic

2. Lantos (2001) 1. Ethical 2. Altruistic 3. Strategic

3. Sen & Bhattacharya (2001) 1. Community support 2. Diversity 3. Employee support 4. Environment 5. Non-domestic operations 6. Product

Table 2. Widely used multidimensional definitions in CSR literature, own.

Multidimensional definitions of CSR appear to have a greater prevalence than societal-

marketing based definitions in studies concerning the relationship between CSR and company

benefits. One reason for this is that multidimensional definitions allow for deeper examination

of diverse corporate CSR initiatives (Carroll & Shabana, 2010). Another reason is that such

definitions are useful when attempting to identify specific types of company benefits,

occurring as a result of the execution of particular CSR initiatives. For example, by using

multidimensional definitions, some researchers have been able to ascertain that a proactive,

ethical CSR initiative of a company regarding the environment could actually lower the costs

of fulfilling future environment regulations. Other researchers have observed that

philanthropic CSR initiatives, such as corporate giving (donations) to local or national

charitable organizations, can enhance the reputation and image of companies among its

shareholders, including their customers (Carroll & Shabana, 2010).

10

2.2 CSR & its influence on consumer purchasing behavior

In the existent literature, studies attempting to identify the positive influence of CSR

initiatives (CSRI) on consumer purchasing behavior (CPB) offer conflicting results.

Consequently, there appears to be three main conflicting theories regarding this phenomenon

(see table 3). The first theory posits that CSR initiatives do indeed have a positive effect on

consumer purchasing behavior. The second theory suggests that the actual positive effect of

CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior depends on the amount of support that

consumers have for the specific CSR initiatives executed. The third theory postulates that

CSR initiatives have no effect what so ever on the purchasing behavior of consumers.

The following subsections of the paper will discuss evidence found in the existent literature

supporting each of the abovementioned theories and will identify noteworthy common aspects

(trends) of the studies within each theory (see table 4 for a summary).

Theories Stance regarding the positive influence of CSRI

on CPB

1 Confirmation theory CSR initiatives do influence consumer purchasing

behavior

2 Consumer support dependent theory

The actual level of influence of CSR initiatives on

consumer purchasing behavior depends on the

amount of support that consumers have for a

particular initiative

3 Disconfirmation theory CSR initiatives have no influence what so ever on

consumer purchasing behavior

Table 3. Differing theories regarding the influence of CSRI on CPB, own.

11

2.2.1 Confirmation theory

There are empirical studies in the existent CSR literature that confirm the positive influence

of CSR company initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior. Among the most cited is

Scholder-Eller et al. (2006), who undertook a study that focused on what the authors consider

a common form of CSR initiative: cause-related marketing (CRM). In their study, the authors

find that CRM, which are CSR initiatives undertaken to realize the company’s marketing

goals through supporting of social causes (Barone et al., 2000), does have a positive influence

on the purchasing behavior of consumers, as consumers claim to prefer to buy products from

companies supporting social causes, than from companies who have no such initiatives.

Additional studies focusing on other CSR initiatives also support this theory. For example,

Creyer & Ross (1997) show that the purchasing behavior of consumers is indeed positively

influenced by ethical CSR initiatives. . Moreover, according to the authors, ethical CSR

initiatives can influence consumers to a level where they are willing to pay significantly

higher prices for products manufactured by firms that undertake such initiatives. These results

are confirmed by Castaldo et al. (2009),, whose study reveals that consumers are indeed

willing to pay higher prices for fair trade products.

Finally, Sen et al. (2006) examined the influence of a real-world philanthropic CSR initiative

of a company on consumer purchasing intentions. CSR initiatives involving philanthropy

(corporate donations) were shown to positively influence the purchasing behavior of

consumers, who expressed their intention to support the company making the donation rather

that its competitors.

There are particular common aspects worth noting in the abovementioned studies. The first is

that they all supported this theory by collecting empirical data from consumers through

surveys. The second is that they all use societal-marketing based definitions of CSR, as

opposed to multidimensional definitions. Consequently, these studies treat the concept of

CSR in an abstract (general) way. Thirdly, all of the studies focus on one CSR dimension and,

except Castaldo et al. (2009) whose study focuses on the fair-trade retail industry in general,

the studies do not appear to focus on specific industries, and they were all carried our in the

United States.

12

2.2.2 Consumer support dependent theory

Several other studies show that the extent to which a company’s CSR initiatives positively

influence the purchasing behavior of consumers, depend on the support that consumers have

for a particular type of CSR initiative. In a study comparing the diversity and non-domestic

operations dimensions of CSR initiatives, Sen & Bhattacharya (2001) find that the non-

domestic initiatives of companies (fair and safe manufacturing practices overseas) have a

more positive effect on the purchasing behavior of American consumers in the electronic

industry, than initiatives focused on diversity issues (equal opportunity employment).

Conversely, in studies of American consumers in the IT, footwear, tobacco, and fast-food

industries, David et al. (2005) find that ethical CSR initiatives (including issues regarding the

fair an humane treatments of employees), have a greater influence in the purchasing behavior

of consumers than initiatives focused on cause-related marketing (CRM), which they call

discretionary CSR.

There appears to be only two studies that focus on the CSR initiatives of grocery product

manufacturers, and their results and approach put them under the consumer support dependent

theory. One of these is Anselmsson & Johansson (2007), which investigate the relationship of

CSR and brand positioning, and find that CSR initiatives focusing on product responsibility

(including labels giving complete content declaration), have a greater influence on the

purchasing behavior of Swedish consumers of frozen foods, than initiatives focused on

environmental responsibility (including recyclable packaging and organic/sustainable

products). The second study, undertaken by Du et al. (2007), finds that CSR initiatives

focusing on environmental responsibility (including environmental packaging), have a greater

effect on the purchasing behavior of American yogurt consumers, than philanthropic

initiatives (corporate donations).

Finally, in order to measure the level of influence that CSR initiatives have on the purchasing

behavior of consumers, Mohr & Webb (2005) compared the influence of two CSR initiatives

relative to price. The authors generated a mixture of conditions, where combinations of price

level and CSR initiatives were manipulated. Their results show that environmental CSR

initiatives (including pollution control) have a greater influence on the purchasing behavior of

American footwear consumers, than philanthropic initiatives (corporate donations), as

environmental initiatives were actually able to affect consumers’ purchasing intent more than

price.

13

There are several common aspects among the studies supporting this theory that are

noteworthy. Firstly, other than Anselmsson & Johansson (2007), which used structured

interviews, all of the abovementioned studies used surveys to collect empirical data from

consumers. Secondly, all of the researchers used multidimensional definitions of CSR. Some

studies, e.g. Anselmson & Johansson (2007) and David et al. (2005), used previously tested

multidimensional conceptualizations of CSR, e.g. that of Sen & Bharracharya (2001), as a

basis to create their own multidimensional definitions of the phenomenon. However, all of

these studies focus on comparing the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing

behavior between at least two different CSR dimensions: according to Mohr & Webb (2005),

this improves the generalizability of the findings.

Another common aspect among the studies supporting this theory, is that they tend to focus

on specific industries and, with the exception of Anselmsson & Johansson (2007), are all

carried out in the United States.

2.2.3 Disconfirmation theory

A third theory postulates that CSR initiatives by companies have no influence whatsoever on

the purchasing behavior of consumers. This theory is supported by studies that offer

contradictory evidence to the notion that CSR initiatives by companies can have a positive

effect on the purchasing behavior of consumers. One study predominantly cited in the CSR

literature is Mohr et al. (2001). This study finds that the majority of consumers are not

committed to socially responsible consumer behavior (SRCB). The authors define SRCB as a

behavior where consumers base their product purchases on a desire to diminish long-term

harmful effects and amplify long-term beneficial effects on society. Consequently, their

results indicate that consumers do not consider CSR as part of their products purchasing

criteria. Instead, they find that the purchasing behavior of consumers is affected by traditional

criteria; price and quality, as opposed to CSR initiatives.

Additional studies confirm the lack of commitment by consumers to SRCB. A well-cited

study by Carrigan & Atallah (2001) reveals that the only factors/criteria that influence the

purchasing decisions of consumers seem to be traditional criteria, including price and quality,

and not a company’s CSR initiatives, or record regarding social responsibility. The study

shows that consumers are not willing to accept any increment in price or decrement in quality,

14

in order to execute SRCB. De Pelsmacker et al. (2005) also show that price and quality are

still the most important factors/criteria, influencing the purchasing behavior of consumers. In

their study, which analyzes the influence that the ethical CSR initiative of fair trade has on

the purchasing behavior of coffee consumers in Belgium, the authors find that consumers are

not willing to pay a price premium for ethically sourced coffee nor undergo a decrease in

quality in order to practice SRCB.

As with the previous two theories, there are common aspects among the studies supporting

the Disconfirmation theory that are noteworthy. Firstly, as opposed to studies within the two

previously theories, the empirical data collection of two of the three studies are obtained by

interviews. Only the study by De Pelsmacker et al. (2005) uses a survey to collect empirical

data from consumers. Secondly, like all of the studies supporting the Confirmation theory, the

three studies within this theory use societal-marketing based definitions, as opposed to

multidimensional definitions. Therefore, one can conclude that the studies supporting this

theory treat the concept of CSR in an abstract (general) way. Thirdly, similar to the studies

supporting the Confirmation theory, all of these studies focus on one CSR dimension. Both

Carrigan & Attala (2001) and De Pelsmacker et al. (2005) focus on initiatives within the

ethical dimension, while Mohr et al. (2001) focus on the philanthropic dimension. Forthly,

similar to the majority of the studies supporting the Confirmation theory, the studies of this

theory do not appear to focus on particular industries, with the exception of De Pelsmacker et

al. (2005), who focus on one CSR initiative in the coffee retail industry. However, unlike

studies supporting the Confirmation or Consumer support dependent theories, where all or the

majority of the studies are carried out in the United States, studies supporting this theory are

all carried out in different countries: Mohr et al. (2001) in the U.S.; Carrigan & Attalla (2001)

in the U.K.; De Pelsmacker et al. (2005) in Belgium.

15

Theories

Data Collection

Method

Method of Defining

CSR

No. of Studied CSR Dimensions

Specific Industry

Focus

Carried out outside the

United States

1 Confirmation

theory

Surveys Societal-marketing based

One dimension

No3 No

2 Consumer support dependent theory

Surveys1 Multi-dimensional

At least two dimensions

Yes No1

3 Disconfirmation theory

Interviews2 Societal-marketing based

One dimension

No2 Yes

1 with the exception of Anselmsson & Johansson (2007)

2 with the exception of De Pelsmacker et al. (2005)

3with the exception of Castaldo et al. (2009)

Table 4. Trends of studies within the presented differing theories, own.

2.3 Measuring the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior

Among the relevant literature for this study, there appears to be four main elements that can

be used to measure the level of influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing

behavior: consumer awareness, consumer perception of company motivation, product price,

and product quality. These elements and their role in the measurement of the influence of

CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior will be explained in the following

subsections.

2.3.1 Consumer awareness of CSR

Consumers’ awareness of CSR initiatives is needed in order for consumers to respond to them

(McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004; Du et al., 2007). However, the

majority of the existent research has not taken consumer awareness into account (Mohr et al.

2001). Most studies actually assume that consumers are aware of the CSR initiatives, or have

created the awareness by providing cases of company CSR initiatives and assessing consumer

16

responses afterwards (Sen et al., 2006; Mohr et al., 2001). The majority of such studies have

been carried out in laboratory settings (Du et al., 2010). However, studies carried out in real-

world settings (e.g., Pomering & Dolnicar, 2009; Du et al., 2007; Sen et al., 2006) posit that

consumer awareness is characteristically low; thereby confirming the notion proposed by

Bhattacharya & Sen (2004) that consumer awareness is rather low. Therefore, one can

determine that the element of consumer awareness is key, when measuring the influence of

initiatives on consumer behavior.

2.3.2 Consumer perception of company motivation

Awareness by itself is not sufficient to be able to measure the level of influence on consumer

purchasing behavior (Du et al., 2007). Just because consumers are, does not mean that they

will instinctively respond positively to initiatives (Anselmsson & Johansson, 2007).

However, studies such as Lichtenstein et al. (2004), Forehand & Grier (2003) and Yoon,

Gurhan-Canli & Schwarz (2006) suggest that the positive influence of initiatives that

consumers are aware of is actually moderated by the perceptions they have regarding the

motives of companies for undertaking such initiatives; several additional studies confirm this.

In a study of the influence of consumer-perceived company motivation on purchasing

behavior, Becker-Olsen, Cudmore & Hill (2006) find that CSR initiatives, which consumers

perceive to be socially motivated, have a greater influence on the purchasing behavior than

initiatives perceived to be profit motivated. Studies by Barone et al. (2000) and Du et al.

(2007) yield the same result, as both studies show that perceived positive (genuinely cause-

supportive) motives have a greater effect on the purchasing behavior of consumers, than

motives perceived as negative (cause-exploitative). Scholder-Ellen et al. (2006) also support

that the level of influence on consumer purchasing behavior depends on their perception of

the firm’s motives. In this study, the authors find that company motives perceived to be

driven by morals (socially-oriented motives), influence the purchasing behavior more than

motives perceived to be driven by profit-oriented motives.

Finally, Carrigan & Attala (2001) and Mohr et al. (2001) posit that one of the main reasons

for their findings, which yield that company CSR initiatives have no influence what so ever

on purchasing behavior, is due to the lack of trust regarding the genuineness of the motives

behind the initiatives. Consequently, the consumer’s perception of a firm’s motives is a key

17

element to consider, when measuring the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer

purchasing behavior.

2.3.3 Product price

The price is considered to be a traditional purchasing criterion for consumers (Boulstridge &

Carrigan, 2000; Öberseder, Schlegelmilch & Gruber, 2011; Mohr et al., 2001; De Pelsmacker

et al., 2005). Consequently, price has been used in studies measuring the influence of CSR

initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior (e.g., Creyer & Ross, 1997; Carrigan & Attalla,

2001; Mohr & Webb, 2005; Castaldo et al., 2009). Furthermore, Barone et al. (2000) provide

evidence that positive consumer-perceived company motivation is moderated by product

price; in turn affecting the influence initiatives have on purchasing behavior. That is to say,

even if consumers perceive the motivation of firms as genuine, an increase in product price

can diminish such a positive influence; as consumers may not be so inclined to pay a premium

(Belk, Devinney & Eckhardt, 2005; Auger, Burke, Devinney & Louviere, 2003).

Therefore, its use as a traditional purchasing criterion for consumers, as well as being a

moderator of positive consumer-perceived company motivations, motivates product price to

be taken into consideration when measuring the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer

purchasing behavior.

2.3.4 Product quality

Product quality is also considered to be a traditional purchasing criterion (Webb, Mohr &

Harriss, 2008; Bronn & Vrioni, 2001; Du et al., 2007; Mohr & Webb, 2005). Consequently,

quality has been used to measure the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing

behavior (e.g., Mohr et al., 2001; Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; De Pelsmacker et al., 2005).

Barone et al. (2000) provide evidence that,, product quality also moderates the effect of a

positive consumer-perceived company motivation; in turn affecting the influence that CSR

initiatives have on purchasing behavior; i.e., even if consumers perceive the motivation of an

initiative as genuine, a decrease in product quality may diminish the influence such initiatives

can have on a purchasing decision, as consumers may not be so inclined to purchase CSR-

related products at the cost of decreased quality (Luo & Bhattacharya, 2006; Bray, Johns &

Kilburn, 2011).

18

Hence, product quality is also an element to take into consideration, when attempting to

measure the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior.

2.4 Classifying CSR initiatives

Before proposing a model that can be used to measure the influence of CSR initiatives on

consumer purchasing behavior and identify the type of initiatives that have the greatest

positive effect on this behavior (thereby achieving the aim of this study), a conceptual

framework of CSR needs to be chosen in order to classify such initiatives.

The existent literature provides many multidimensional definitions of CSR, which classify

initiatives in different types, as researchers seem to custom-make their definitions to fit CSR

within a particular context or study. Nevertheless, there appears to be three multidimensional

definitions of CSR (posited by Carroll, 1991; Lantos, 2001; and Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001,

respectively) widely used in the CSR literature as ready-applicable frameworks. Based on the

research done for this study, the multidimensional definitions posited by Carroll (1991) and

Sen & Bhattacharya (2001) appear to have a greater prevalence in studies concerning the

relationship between CSR and consumer behavior. This is especially the case with the

multidimensional definition posited by Sen & Bhattacharya (2001), which proposes a greater

number of specific CSR dimensions and initiatives, allowing for a detailed identification of

such initiatives. Consequently, this study will apply the CSR conceptual framework of Sen &

Bhattacharya (2001), classifying CSR initiatives into a total of six dimensions (see table 5).

19

Dimensions (Types) Examples of CSR Initiatives

1. Community Support (corporate giving)

• Supporting the arts, health and education programs • Supporting underprivileged areas and people

2. Diversity • Initiatives involving the encouragement and increase in diversity regarding gender, sex, race, sexual orientation, etc., both inside and outside the organization

3. Employee Support • Initiatives concerning a company’s employee issues such as job safety, job security, employee involvement, etc.

4. Environment • Initiatives focusing on environmental responsibility, e.g. manufacturing environmentally friendly products, recycling, pollution control, waste management, ethical treatment of animals, etc.

5. Non-domestic operations (operations in foreign markets)

• Ethical labor practices in foreign subsidiaries, • Ethical selection of foreign markets to operate in, e.g.

avoiding establishing operations in countries with human rights violations

6. Product Responsibility • Initiatives dealing with product safety, marketing controversies, safe research and development, etc.

Table 5. Dimensions of CSR initiatives, adapted from Sen & Bhattacharya (2001)

20

2.5 Evaluation of the theories

According to Philipson (2016-04-15), the state of the art (SOTA) is a scale that allows one to

understand to what degree the academia (researchers) believe that particular theories are able

to explicate reality. According to the author, this scale can be thought of as one between 0 and

just below100%, and such a scale can be expressed by classifying theories into three levels:

dominating (50% - 70%), contradicting emerging theories (20% - 30%) and proposal theories

(5%-10%).

The classification of theories within the aforementioned categories/levels depends on how

well accepted (cited by other authors) and validated (empirically confirmed by other authors)

they are (see table 6 below). According to Philipson (2016-04-15), theories that have a large

number of citations (500 or more) and appear to be well empirically validated by other studies

are considered to be dominant. Theories are considered emerging if they have fewer citations

(less than 500) and there appears to be some empirical validation. Theories with relatively

few citations (e.g. less than 200) and some or limited validation are considered to be

proposals. The number of citations and evidence of empirical validation can be respectively

assessed by using databases such as Google scholar and reading the abstract of studies citing

the theories in order to see if other authors empirically validated them.

According to the author, understanding the classification of theories within a particular

phenomena being studied allows one to identify possible theoretical gaps (e.g. contradictory

theories) from which to build studies on. In addition, the SOTA evaluation allows the

researcher to show an outline of the main theories used in the study and their relevance to

specific phenomena.

21

22

Table 6. State-of-the-art evaluation, own.

2.5.1 Reflection over the state of the art

When reflecting over the state-of-the-art (SOTA), it is clearly noticeable that the phenomenon

of CSR is one that is variably conceptualized and is a phenomenon that appears to have been

particularly touched upon during the last five to fifteen years. Although variability regarding

the conceptualization of the phenomenon exists, two main types of conceptualizations appear

to emerge from the literature, societal-marketing based conceptualizations and

multidimensional conceptualizations. Given the aim of this study, the multidimensional

conceptualizations are of particular focus.

23

Taking into consideration the aim of this study, contradictory theories regarding the

phenomenon of the positive influence of CSR on consumer behavior are of most importance.

Regarding these theories, the SOTA clearly shows that, although both, the confirmation

theory and the consumer-support dependent theory appear to be more empirically validated

than the disconfirmation theory, all three of these theories still remain as emerging (in

general). Therefore, further empirical validation is needed regarding this main phenomenon.

Finally, regarding the phenomenon of the elements for measuring the positive influence of

CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior, the SOTA shows that the existent literature

provides at least four elements that have been previously used in empirical studies to achieve

this. These elements are awareness, consumer-perceived company motivation, product price

and product quality.

2.6 Model

As a consequence of the above literature review, a model has been developed for measuring

the influence of CSR initiatives on the purchasing behavior of Swedish grocery store

consumers and identifying the type of initiatives that have the greatest positive effect.

2.6.1 Measuring consumer sensitivity to CSR initiatives

As noted in the previous sections of this chapter, the existent literature shows that awareness

is a prerequisite to being able to measure the influence of such initiatives. Nevertheless,

existent literature also shows that mere awareness of a CSR initiative will not cause

consumers to respond positively to that initiative. The possible favorable response is

moderated by the consumer-perceived company motivation. In turn, the possible positive

effect of the consumer-perceived company motivation on purchasing behavior is moderated

by traditional purchasing criteria, as product price and product quality. Hence, in summary,

the existent literature provides at least four elements to consider when measuring the

influence of CSR initiatives (CSRI) on consumer purchasing behavior (CPB): an independent

variable, awareness, and three moderating factors (F), consumer-perceived company

motivation, product price and product quality (see figure 1).

24

Figure 1. Four elements for measuring CSRI influence on CPB, own.

However, in addition to the elements in the existent literature, it is important to consider the

three different theories, regarding the positive influence of CSR initiatives on consumer

purchasing behavior and the differences between studies. Specifically, it is important to note

that all of the investigations that consider and include more than one type/dimension of CSR

initiatives hold that the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior

depends on whether the consumers are sympathetic to/agree with such initiatives.

Consequently, as this study will consider all CSR initiatives relevant to Swedish grocery store

consumers, the proposed model includes consumer support for CSR initiatives, as an element

for measuring the level of influence that CSR initiatives have on consumer purchasing

behavior. More specifically, the model will include consumer support, along with awareness,

as a precondition to being able to measure the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer

purchasing behavior. Since it can be argued, based on the results of studies in the consumer

support dependent theory, that consumer support for a CSR initiative, as with the awareness

element, is needed, in order for consumers to respond to such an initiative.

Hence, the proposed model for measuring the level of influence of company CSR initiatives

on consumer purchasing behavior will consider a total of five elements: two independent

variables, awareness and consumer support, and three moderating factors, consumer-

perceived company motivation, product price and product quality; as shown in figure 2.

25

Figure 2. Proposed model for measuring CSRI influence on CPB, own.

To measure the level of influence that company CSR initiatives have on consumer purchasing

behavior, one must first determine if consumers are aware of the initiatives, the awareness

element, and if consumers are sympathetic to such initiatives, the consumer support element;

see figure 2. Once these criteria are met, the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer

purchasing behavior can be measured. In order to do this, one needs to determine how

sensitive consumers are to those initiatives that they are aware of and support. This sensitivity

can be determined by considering the remaining elements of consumer-perceived company

motivation, product price, and product quality. The consideration of these three moderating

factors will result in three possible scenarios (S1, S2, and S3) that will lead to three particular

outcomes, determining the influence that initiatives have on the purchasing behavior is high,

moderate, or low.

2.6.2 Scenario 1: High influence

The first scenario (S1) is one where consumers perceive a company’s motivation as genuinely

cause-supportive. Trusting that the motives behind the initiatives are genuine, these

consumers actually place more importance on the CSR attribute of the product than on

product price and product quality; thereby deviating from the use of traditional purchasing

criteria, when making purchasing decisions. Consequently, these consumers actually sacrifice

product price and/or product quality attributes to sponsor CSR-related products. That is to

say, these consumers are willing to purchase CSR-related products at a higher price and/or

lower quality in order to sponsor an initiative that they are aware of and support. In summary,

as these consumers trust the motives behind the initiatives are genuine, they are willing to

deviate from the traditional purchasing criteria in favor of CSR-related products; showing that

26

they are highly sensitive to the initiatives, when making purchasing decisions. Therefore, this

outcome would indicate that consumers’ purchasing behavior is highly influenced by the

initiatives (see figure 3).

Figure 3. Scenario 1: High Influence of CSRI on CPB, own.

2.6.3 Scenario 2: Moderate influence

The second scenario (S2) is also one where consumers perceive a company’s motivation as

genuinely cause-supportive. However, even thought these consumers trust that the motives

are genuine, and therefore consider the CSR attribute of the product, they still place more

importance on product price and product quality, than on the CSR attributes, and are

therefore not willing to deviate from the use of traditional purchasing criteria. Consequently,

these consumers do not sacrifice product price and/or product quality attributes, in order to

sponsor CSR-related products. In summary, even though these consumers trust the motives

behind the initiatives as genuinely cause-supportive, they are nevertheless not deviating from

traditional purchasing criteria in favor of CSR-related attributes. This indicates that these

consumers are moderately sensitive to CSR initiatives, since the effect of the consumer-

perceived company motivation factor has been moderated by the factors of product price and

product quality. Therefore, this outcome would indicate that consumers’ purchasing behavior

is moderately influenced by CSR initiatives (see figure 4).

27

Figure 4. Scenario 2: Moderate Influence of CSRI on CPB, own

2.6.4 Scenario 3: Low influence

The third scenario (S3) is one where consumers perceive a company’s motivation as cause-

exploitative. Distrusting that the motives are genuine, these consumers actually place no

importance on the CSR attributes of the product, only focusing on product price and product

quality, thereby only considering traditional purchasing criteria. Consequently, they do not

sacrifice product price and/or product quality attributes in order to sponsor CSR-related

products. That is to say, these consumers do not purchase CSR-related products at a higher

price and/or lower quality in order to sponsor initiatives that they are aware of and support, as

they do not trust the motives as genuinely cause-supportive. In summary, these consumers

distrust that the motives are genuinely cause-supportive and therefore only consider

traditional purchasing criteria, when making their purchasing decisions. This shows that these

consumers are barely sensitive to CSR initiatives, when making purchasing decisions.

Therefore, this outcome indicates that consumers’ purchasing behavior is barely influenced by

CSR initiatives (i.e. the level of influence behavior is low) (see figure 5).

Figure 5. Scenario 3: Low Influence of CSRI on CPB, own.

28

3. Methodology chapter

3.1 Research design

Taking the aim and research questions into consideration, the empirical part of this study

focuses particularly on the third research question. Specifically, the purpose of the empirical

research is to examine the proposed framework (model) in order to find any possible

additional scenarios (other than the three posited) resulting from the use of the model that can

determine the level of influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior. Bearing

this in mind, this study has used a design based on interviews in order to study the relevant

research question.

Specifically, this study has employed a qualitative interview design, known in the existent

literature as standardized open-ended interviews (Turner, 2010). The terms standardized and

open-ended refer to the actual interview questions and the answers provided by the

participants, respectively. Standardized interviews are interviews in which all of the

participants are asked the same exact questions in the same order (Gephart, 2013; Turner,

2010; Qu & Dumay, 2011). Open-ended interviews are interviews in which the participants

answer the interview questions open-endedly, i.e. participants are allowed to answer the

interview questions freely and with as much detail as they desire (Gephart, 2013; Turner,

2010; Babbie, 2010). Consequently, there are two aspects of standardized open-ended

interviews that improve the quality of this study. The first one is that, by asking the exact

same questions in the same order to all of the participants and allowing them to answer freely,

the probability of the interviewer influencing the results through his/her own bias is

substantially diminished (Qu & Dumay, 2011; Turner, 2010). The second aspect is that, since

the participants are allowed to answer with as much detail as they desire, standardized open-

ended interviews are able to provide rich qualitative data (Turner, 2010, Qu & Dumay, 2011).

Considering that the purpose of this empirical research is to verify a proposed model, the

obtainment of rich qualitative data is particularly important for the quality of this study, as

qualitative data allows researchers to compare the prediction of theories to actual results and

to increase or confront the validity of such theories (Doz, 2011; Gummesson, 2005). Rich

qualitative data also allows researchers to study new frameworks up close and view in greater

detail the relationships of key elements within a framework (Doz, 2011). Moreover, according

to Eisenhart & Graebner (2007) rich qualitative data has the ability to provide researchers

with insight into complicated social processes that quantitative data has trouble revealing.

29

That is to say, rich qualitative data is particularly helpful in comprehending why (or why not)

certain relationships between elements within a framework or theory hold, which is

fundamental in establishing internal validity (Eisenhardt, 1989).

Regarding the scope of the interview questions, following the recommendation of Eisenhardt

& Graebner (2007) for research that is theory-driven, the interview questions were tightly

scoped within the context of the existing theories (concepts) that make up this study’s

proposed framework.

In consideration of the chosen sampling approach (which will be explicated in section 3.2), as

well as the comfortableness and convenience of the potential participants, the interviews were

carried out telephonically. In addition, according to Bryman & Bell (2015), telephone

interviewing can offer researchers certain benefits in comparison to face-to-face qualitative

interviewing. One of these benefits is that it is cheaper for researchers to carry out qualitative

interviews telephonically. Another benefit, which is particularly relevant for this study (as it

will be revealed in the section 3.2), is that telephone interviewing is especially suitable for

research dealing with hidden or hard to reach populations. Lastly, telephone interviewing

may allow researchers to obtain more honest answers to sensitive questions, as respondents

may be less concerned about how to answer sensitive interview questions if the investigator is

not physically present. This last benefit is of great importance to this study, as it may reduce

the respondents’ attitude-behavior gap; which, as explained in the introductory chapter, can

pose a challenge in determining the actual influence of CSR initiatives on the purchasing

behavior of consumers.

There are also, of course, some issues or limitations that can result from using telephone

interviews in qualitative studies. For example, Bryman & Bell (2015) caution that telephone

interviews might not be appropriate for extensive (very long) interviews, as it is easier for

respondents to voluntarily terminate telephone interviews than those carried out face-to-face.

The authors also mention that by incurring in telephone interviews, researchers are not able to

observe the body language of respondents, which could be of importance to certain studies, as

body language can express the respondents’ uneasiness or awkwardness towards a question.

However, as the interviewing process for this study is standardized and the questions are

tightly scoped, as previously explained, the probability of having very long interviews is

minimal. In addition, as the nature of this study is not a controversial one, it is also highly

unlikely that any of the respondents feel uneasy or awkward regarding any of the interview

30

questions. Therefore, considering its benefits and limitations, it could be argued that

telephone interviewing is an appropriate approach to undertake in this particular study.

Finally, following the recommendations of Bryman & Bell (2015), the interviews were audio-

recorded and transcribed. According to the authors, recording and then transcribing interviews

allows researchers to overcome the limitations of their memories and thusly allows for a more

thorough and unbiased examination of responses by participants. Furthermore, audio-

recording and transcribing interviews can assists in dismissing possible claims that the

analysis was influenced by idiosyncrasies, as the preserved recording and transcripts also

allows other researchers to verify the analysis. It is important to note that, in addition to being

informed of the purpose of this study, all of the participating respondents were informed that

the interviews were being recorded and expressed their consent to being recorded before the

interviews began. In addition, all of the respondents were offered the choice of full anonymity

in the study, which all respondents decided to exercise.

3.2 Population and sample

As is evident by now, given its purpose, this study undertakes a qualitative approach to data

collection. Therefore, as is typical for qualitative research, the objective of this study is not to

generalize its findings to a particular population, but to acquire insight into a phenomenon

involving processes/practices that exist within a particular context (Onwuegbuzie & Leech,

2007). Given this objective, the participant/interviewee sample was selected according to

purposive sampling. According to Bryman & Bell (2015), the aim of purposive sampling is to

sample participants strategically so that the chosen participants are actually relevant to the

research questions of the study. In other words, the researcher purposefully selects the

participants/interviewees that can increase the amount of insight into the phenomenon being

studied (Onwuegbuzie & Collins, 2007).

In the case of this study, the relevant population should be composed of grocery store

consumers, who are aware of and support CSR initiatives by companies; since, as explained

in the theory chapter, consumers need to have both awareness of, and support for CSR

initiatives, in order to be able to measure the influence of such initiatives on their purchasing

behavior. Thus, awareness and consumer support were the control variables in selecting the

sample of participants.

31

It is important to note that even though the objective of this study is not to generalize its

findings to a particular population, an attempt will be made (in the concluding arguments of

the study) to identify if there is any relation or fit between the sample obtained and the

relevant population (grocery store consumers who are aware of and support CSR initiatives

by companies) in terms of demographics. This will be done in order to discuss any possible

generalization characteristics of the results. However, a description of the relevant population

for this study in demographic terms is quite challenging. Firstly, there does not appear to be

any studies in the existent literature that uses demographics to describe the population that is

actually aware of company CSR initiatives. Secondly, as mentioned in the theory chapter, the

majority of studies attempting to identify socially responsible consumers (i.e. consumers that

support CSR initiatives) have either assumed that respondents are aware of CSR initiatives

(Mohr et al., 2001), or have created the awareness by providing cases of company CSR

initiatives and assessing consumer responses afterwards (Sen et al., 2006). Therefore, a

demographic description of the population that is both aware of and support company CSR

initiatives is very difficult.

Furthermore, the studies that have attempted to identify/describe, in demographic terms,

socially responsible consumers (i.e. consumers that support CSR initiatives) have obtained

conflicting results (Roberts 1996; Rizkallah, 2012). For example, some studies suggest that

socially responsible behavior is affected by age (e.g. Rawwas & Isakson 2000), gender (e.g.

Dickson, 2001) or educational level (e.g. Carrigan & Attalla, 2001). These studies

respectively claim that socially responsible consumers tend to be of older age, female, and

highly educated. However, Cailleba & Casteran, (2009) as well as Rizkallah (2012) mention

that the majority of empirical studies in the existent literature that have attempted to describe

consumers that support CSR initiatives in terms of demographics, conclude that

demographics are irrelevant in describing / identifying social responsible consumers; as

demographic variables such as age, gender and educational level do not appear to be

significantly related to (i.e. do not significantly influence) consumer CSR support (Tian,

Wang &Yang, 2011; Arli & Tjiptono 2014). That is to say, the majority of studies in the

existent literature show that demographic difference between consumers do not account for

statistically significant differences in consumer CSR support (Ramasamy, Yeung & Chen,

2013).

For example, a study by Roberts (1996) investigating the effectiveness of using demographics

(age, gender & education) as predictors of socially responsible consumers, yields that

32

demographics are ineffective predictors of such behavior; only accounting for 8% of the

variation in the socially responsible consumer behavior of respondents. Nevertheless, within

this 8% variation, the study yields that people of older age, and female appear to be

marginally more socially responsible than people of younger age and males, respectively;

however, educational level did not appear to affect socially responsible behavior at all. In a

similar and more recent study concerning the demographic variables of age, gender and

education, Stefanska & Wanat (2014) also yield that demographics are ineffective predictors

of social responsible behavior; only accounting for less than 1% of the variation in the

socially responsible consumer behavior of respondents. However, in contradiction to Roberts

(1996), the authors find that only the demographic variable of education is responsible for this

1% variation, where people with higher education tend to be marginally more socially

responsible than people with lower levels of education. The gender and age variables did not

appear to affect socially responsible behavior at all.

As one can observe from the aforementioned explanation, describing the population of

consumers that support CSR initiatives in terms of demographics is, as Ramasamy et al.

(2013) conclude, technically problematic. In addition, the fact that there appears to be no

studies in the existent literature that demographically describe the population that is aware of

CSR initiatives, further complicates this task; as it is not possible to demographically

identify/describe a population that is both aware of and support CSR initiatives. Nevertheless,

as there are some studies (albeit a minority) that posit the relevance of age, gender and

education regarding consumer support for CSR initiatives, this study has taken these

demographic variables into consideration and has therefore included interview questions

regarding the respondents’ age, gender and education level (see Table 7). This will facilitate

the process of finding if there is a possibility to relate the sample obtained in this study with

any of the populations described in the aforementioned studies as socially responsible

consumers; which will in turn allow for a discussion of possible generalization characteristics

of the results. Furthermore, this demographic information could be of interest to future

researchers applying this study’s proposed model.

Regarding the approach for the selection of the participants, this study employed the

purposive sampling approach known as snowball sampling. In this purposive sampling

approach, the researcher gains access to relevant participants through contact details provided

by other relevant participants (Higginbottom, 2004; Bryman & Bell, 2015). In the case of this

study, I initially selected acquaintances that were relevant to the research questions, (they

33

meet the control variables of the study), which then provided the contact details of further

participants, who were also of relevance to the study.

Snowball sampling is one of the most used sampling approaches in qualitative research across

various disciplines and can be particularly effective when attempting to obtain information

about hidden populations (Noy, 2008). That is to say, this approach can be used as a strategy

in qualitative research, when attempting to sample populations that are hard to reach or

difficult to identify because there is no known sampling frame (number of units in the

population) from which the sample can be taken (Sadler, Lee, Lim & Fullerton, 2010;

Bryman & Bell, 2015). In the case of this study, the relevant/target sample falls under the

category of hidden or hard to reach population, as there is no way to easily identify which

individuals are aware of company CSR initiatives and support them: i.e. there is no way of

knowing which extent of the population (sample frame) the sample should be taken from.

Therefore, according to the existent literature, the use of a snowball sampling approach could

be deemed appropriate in this case.

Regarding the size of the sample, the existent literature mentions that in qualitative studies,

there are no exact rules regarding exact sample sizes, but the sample should not be so small as

to make it challenging to achieve data saturation/redundancy, i.e. when new no new

information or outcomes arise from the interviewing process (Tuckett, 2004; Marshall, 1996;

Bryman & Bell, 2015). Therefore, Bryman & Bell (2015) state that in qualitative research,

rather than being preoccupied with searching existent literature for customary sample sizes,

the most important thing is to be clear about the sampling method used and why the choice of

sample size is appropriate for the study. Furthermore, the authors also mention that, in the

case of qualitative interviews that are recorded and transcribed, it is important for researchers

to be realistic in regards to the number of interviews undertaken; as transcribing interviews

word for word is a very time consuming task.

Taking all of the aforementioned factors into consideration, in addition to the fact that the

method of analysis chosen (a variant of grounded theory) is also very time consuming and

becomes cumbersome and poses hurdles as the observational units (respondents in this case)

grow above 10 (Philipson, 2016-03-23), a target sample size of 10 respondents/interviews was

chosen for this study. This target size is also consistent with the course’s required sample size

of 10 respondents for qualitative studies (as mentioned by the current instructor for the Master

34

Thesis in Business Administration course at the University of Gävle). Therefore a target

sample size of 10 respondents could be considered appropriate for this study.

3.3 Operationalizing

In order to make sure that the interview questions are relevant to the aim of this study and the

proposed model, the following table (table 7) was created. The table illustrates the questions

that were asked and their relation to the relevant theoretical concepts included in the proposed

framework for measuring the influence of CSR initiatives on consumer purchasing behavior.

References to the relevant concepts are also listed. The questions aimed at obtaining

demographic characteristics of respondents have also been added.

It is also important to know that in order to reduce the gap between willingness and actual

behavior of the respondents (the attitude-behavior gap), the questions have been formulated in

a manner that reflects actual behavior (e.g. “have you” or “do you”) as opposed to